Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
cfu_mail

cfu_mail

by MrShurukan
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
Python
Local

read_message

Read-only

Read an email message without marking it as seen and retrieve up to 30,000 characters of text plus attachment IDs for review or processing.

Instructions

Read without marking seen. Returns text up to 30000 chars and attachment IDs.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "account_id": "<account_id>",
      "folder": "<folder>",
      "uidvalidity": "<uidvalidity>",
      "uid": "<uid>"
    },
    "name": "read_message"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
uidYes
folderYes
account_idYes
uidvalidityYes

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. First observedv0.2.1

TDQS

A3.5/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already cover the safety profile (readOnlyHint=true, destructiveHint=false), yet the description adds real value beyond them: no seen-flag side effect, a hard 30000-character truncation limit, and the fact that attachments come back as IDs rather than content, which routes the agent to download_attachment. It does not address pagination or what happens with large multipart messages.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two tight sentences with zero filler, the non-mutating behavior front-loaded and the return-shape constraint immediately after. Nothing to cut.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness3/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no output schema, the description usefully characterizes the return value (text capped at 30000 chars, attachment IDs), which is the main thing an agent needs. But for a tool with four mandatory, fully undocumented parameters and no annotations on addressing semantics, the near-total silence on inputs leaves a real gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters2/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0% across four required parameters, and the description explains none of them. 'uidvalidity' in particular is an obscure IMAP concept that an agent cannot infer, and the relationship between folder, uid, and uidvalidity is left entirely to guesswork.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose4/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('read' a message) plus a defining behavioral qualifier ('without marking seen'), so an agent knows this fetches message content rather than listing or searching. It is distinguishable from search_messages and download_attachment by implication, though no sibling is named explicitly.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'without marking seen' implies a use case (peek at content without changing read state), but the description never says when to prefer this over preview_draft, search_messages, or a normal read, and states no prerequisites.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools